35mm Summicron IV vs. 35mm Summilux Pre-ASPH vs. Zeiss Biogon f2 vs. VC Nokton f1.2

I got the Summicron IV, never cared too much about it's qualities (definately better than my old FD), didn't have much choice back then and got it for a bargain. I think it's fantastic. Vignettes like a bitch sometimes, I get some flair shooting f/11 against the sun (I'll try a bit wider apertures, I think it draws better). But boy, this picture


Simon Larbalestier said:
48_simon_larbalestier.jpg
Click to expand...

that's definately the V4 summicron. Not a bokeh addict but isn't this sweeeeeet?
 
got myself a summicron IV about 2 weeks ago. i'm very pleased with it but i havn't tried any of the others
4435491771_e2d89e3567_b.jpg

shot at f2 with a M8, some say that the bokeh is better at smaller apature but i like it at it's largest apature aswell
 
joe r said:
The sleeper lens that hasn't been mentioned is the Voigtlander 35/1.7. I sold a Leica 35/2 ASPH and picked up the Voigtlander 35/1.7 used for $300. No regrets. I actually prefer the bokeh of the Voigtlander.
Click to expand...


AGREED. I had one, sold it for a cron asph and have just bought another after selling the cron. I shot some testers today with the Ultron compaired to my pre asph lux and I have to say at 1.7 and f2 it's a much nicer look to me than the lux at 1.4 and f2. The Ultron images are very like a version iv cron and also look very similar to my version 5 cron 50'.
The 35 lux to my mind is a 2.8 lens with what could be described as particular qualities at 1.4 and f2. I always thought that the 50 lux was an f2 lens with those same qualities at 1.4.
Some people call it glow, I call it out of focus soft. You can get the same effect by taking toothpaste and polishing the front element of any sharp lens you own!!!!
 
The only problem I'll have with the summicron IV is that using it means the 35 lux asph is left off the camera! I suspect that daylight shooting will be dome with the cron, and very low light where 1.4 is needed with the lux....Peter
 
samoksner said:
I'm looking to get a 35mm to complement my 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH, but i am a bit lost in my choices. I can't afford the latest ASPHs, so those are out. I've narrowed my search to the Leica Summicron IV (bokeh king), Leica Summilux Pre-ASPH, the Zeiss Biogon (f 2) and perhaps the VC Nokton f1.2 Aspherical.

.... I excluded the VC 35mm f1.4 because it has such a dry look, i feel like the images have no heart to them and it does have some rather crazy flare.
Click to expand...

I find it impossible to give you advice since your 4 candidates have a price range from US 600 to > 1500, size goes from small to huge, and IQ is all over the board with respect to flare, distortion, contrast, etc.

Also, I would be interested what "crazy" flare examples you have for the 35/1.4 Nokton (SC or MC ?). If you don't like flare, you can exclude the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph, and possibly the 35/2 IV.


BTW, Summilux pre-asph, and Summicron IV prices are comparable to good used copies of the 35/2 asph.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
Leica lenses are wonderful but overpriced. Zeiss glass, Biogon & Planar, I find is clean and close to the Crons. CV is small and a true value - although the 40mm Nokton can have stiff focus. But great lens. Jupiters are fantastic - particularly the 3 - for their bokeh and character.

Still... I like the size of the Leica lenses. Compact is a good thing in the end. But it needn't be primary in your choice. There's a lot of great glass out there for not a lot of money. And, bottom line... imperfections are fun.
 
Firstly, always a privilege to learn so much from the shared experience and opinions of enthusiasts here.

Recently and hesitantly moved from M8 to M9 and have just pulled the trigger on my first 35mm lens (I'm a novice with one year's experience with Leica and am new to photography).

Haven't had the opportunity to try out any 35mm lenses and to be honest I don't have to, for me it just had to be the 'lux 35mm pre asph... pedigree, history, recognisable character/subliminal classic Leica 'look' and of course it's Dr Mandler.

Happy clicking, Frank.

M9 vc12/cron28.6bit/cron50pre asph.6bit/noc50F1/cron90 pre asph/tele elmarit90)
 
ramosa said:
there should be a "sniglet" for RFF threads that meander over a few years, with several-year gaps between posts :)
Click to expand...

Let me help give this one a gentle push back into the light. :angel:
Any original posters from the thread still around and have updated opinions?

I'm interested in a 35 Lux pre ASPH and wondered if anyone who has owned one (and the 35 Cron v4) could comment on the relative build quality?

I've had two 35 Cron v4s over time but I disliked the build quality a lot, relative to its current value, it felt like a piece of junk really!

Of course the Lux pre ASPH is potentially even more expensive :O
Does it have a more solid feeling to it? It looks (I've only seen pictures of it), fairly similar to the Cron v4...

The other 35mm lens on my radar is the Cron v1 and I'm guessing that is a much more solid beast, the bigger issue being condition of the glass within (and the goggles/not goggles.)

It would be exclusively for use on film, some color. Recommend me!
 
The v4 certainly slipped in build quality, especially the early plastic-infused copies like mine, but "piece of junk" might be an overstatement. :) Given the market value of all 'cron 35s have held for the duration of this thread, the prudent choice is v3 as usual. All pre-ASPH versions fit a film M to perfection, otherwise we might all be using the Nokton f/1.2. For reasons of build quality, handling, classic rendering and compact size, I have settled on to the Summaron f/2.8: Wetzlar was never better, IMO.
 
The Summilux 35mm f/1.4 pre asph v1 (steel rim) is the best build 35mm lens from Leitz.

The chrome version of the Summicron 35mm f/2 pre asph v4 (made in Germany) is very solid too, but much less expensive.

Erik.
 
agree with Eric, the Steel Rim is world class built, and the V1 Summicron i remember was too.
the V4 summicron i had in chrome was also suberb built (better than the black copies), i think brass matters in those lenses.
 
These sorts of discussions seem to me to always be so subjective - usually dependent on what the particular member owns right now, and possibly what they may be selling in the future. :)

In the same spirit(!) I'll say that I've owned 2 different pre-asph 35mm Summiluxes - both of them in really nice shape, but both of which I sold because I felt when used wide open they were simply too soft and 'glowing' (and even though people call it 'Leica glow' sometimes it's just horrible indefinition and coma - and I'm saying this as someone who really likes low-contrast, slightly unsharp, 'old-fashioned' lenses!) Having said that, every now and then I'm tempted to get one again...

Now I own both a V4 Summicron 35 and the Summicron-C 40mm that someone else mentioned in this ancient thread. When I first bought the v4, the plastic component that gives the positive 'click stops' for apertures had worn out - but I had the whole lens CLA'ed and collimated and this part was changed, and now the lens focuses perfectly and feels really solid and beautiful. For me, it has just the right balance of (ahem) 'Leica glow' and sharpness - a beautiful, subtle look.
Some people call it over-valued, but I don't think you'll find many owners of the lens who feel that way about it. Worth every penny imho.

The Summicron-C is a vastly undervalued lens. The look is indistinguishable from the V4 Summicron - it has a lovely, classic creamy subtlety to the images - and the build quality might maybe even be a touch better(?) Lots of people have now written about this lens as Leica's "best-kept secret" - in fact this has been repeated so often the opposite is now the case. But for some reason these little beauties still sell for (relative) peanuts. I should know - I was recently trying to sell an entire beautiful CL kit and failed miserably even at a price that this lens deserves on its own.

All my subjective opinion of course.
 
As it has mentioned by several people already, the choices depend on many issues that cannot be generalized in a simple statement: "choose lens x".
I happen to own, use, and like results from my Version 2 Summilux pre-asph; the first version Summicron; the modern Zeiss Biogon 35/2. I use less often the Canon RF 35mm lenses (1.5/1.8/2.0/2.8). I may have too many good lenses for usage.
 
I don't find the V4 cron to be over-valued, to me it's the best of the 35 cron line (-> prefer it by a mile to the asph) personall I also like tab-apertured-V2 a lot which is really undervalued lens imo.

i also agree that V2 Summiluxes are not for everyone, but you can work into their favor if you know how the lens react, it has a learning curve, V1 lux is better than V2 probably it's a different sort of glass they used back then or just sample variation in my experience.

compared to all luxes the V4 cron or summicron-C 40 are 'slide printers' with fantastic results which never disappoint imo.

also all subjective
 
Of course it is all subjective, therefore experiences written down here can be useful, as much as possible.

Personally I think that the early Summilux 35mm f/1.4 pre asph v2 (those with the numbers starting with "222....") are pretty bad lenses. Later versions are much improved. But the v1 (steel rim), starting with "173....", are simply great, optical and mechanical. These differences have caused a lot of misunderstanding and confusion.

Erik.
 
I'm pretty stoked on my combo of Leica 35's, a nice clean and well working copy of the V4 cron and the 35 1.4 FLE, hard to go wrong with that pair in my mind.
 
Erik van Straten said:
Of course it is all subjective, therefore experiences written down here can be useful, as much as possible.

Personally I think that the early Summilux 35mm f/1.4 pre asph v2 (those with the numbers starting with "222....") are pretty bad lenses. Later versions are much improved. But the v1 (steel rim), starting with "173....", are simply great, optical and mechanical. These differences have caused a lot of misunderstanding and confusion.

Erik.
Click to expand...

I have a Summilux pre asph v2, with a 222 number and it's a great lens, so your blanket dismissal simply doesn't stack up. I also owned an earlier steel rim and there was no appreciable difference.

My strong sense is that the steel rim 'superiority' is simply an urban myth. It's the myths that cause misunderstanding, not the lens differences.

Ernst
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom